Identifying System Requirements for Evaluation of Alternative Approaches

[Gary Miller]

Before we can evaluate other approaches, it would be good to identify aspects of the higher education system that we want to maintain and/or build.  The final approach should reinforce key elements of the higher education system needed for the future.

Here are some initial thoughts:

1.             The approach should encourage a diversity of learning opportunities.  The current elective system allows faculty members to offer unique courses that grow out of research work and, at the same time, allow students, to some extent, to individualize their curriculum.  These are strengths that I hope we would maintain or expand.

2.            The approach should allow for the routine transfer of the student’s learning experiences from one institution to another.  The U.S. has more than 3,000 postsecondary providers (from public and private institutions to for-profit companies) and different levels (technical institute to comprehensive research institutions), student mobility is an ongoing need.  This assumes that standards will be commonly shared across institutions and disciplines and, if there are multiple approaches, that equivalences will be established among them.

3.            The approach should continue to allow institutions to evaluate non-college training and life experience and count that toward degree requirements where appropriate.  This could be a growing need as adults will need to continue their educations throughout their work life.

4.            The approach should recognize that how we measure learning has an impact on how institutions charge for tuition.  It will be important that institutions continue to be able to support part-time learners.

5.             The approach should be transparent in terms of qualifying students for state and federal financial aid, both for full-time and part-time study.

6.            The approach should allow for articulation between secondary and postsecondary education, especially for advance placement and dual enrollment courses.   This is an area that can be expected to grow in coming years.

7.            The approach should allow for articulation between degree requirements and requirements for professional licensure, etc.

I’d be interested in what others think of these ideas and any additional system requirements that you think should be identified in order to establish a basis for evaluating alternatives.

------------------

Gary E. Miller

421 Balmoral Way

State College, PA 16801

Blog:  http://garyemiller.blogspot.com/

Phone: 814-237-9203

Cell: 814-883-3442

Skype: garyemiller

[Ryan Watkins]

Thanks for the excellent list. One addition that I would suggest is
that the approach must suitable for the international transfer of
learning experiences and degrees as well. A few years ago I went
through the experience of trying to hire an international faculty
member for a job at a previous institution. After months of hassles
we were finally able to establish that her PhD from the Netherlands
was equivalent to a PhD granted in the US, and thus she could be hired
as full-time faculty. But it should really not be that painful.

Thanks
Ryan

[Tom Abeles]

Let me highlight Ryan's last comment:

But it should really not be that painful

And herein lies the problem. Why should it be "painful" for a community of scholars to take the time to evaluate the credentials of a colleague whom they would like to see on their faculty?

Examine responses to that question and one will find a deeper problem that resides within The Academy. It is addressed, in part in the new volume by Menand, The Marketplace of Ideas..

As an aside, it will also address a larger societal problem or set of problems. But, bottom line, for The Academy, an examination will reveal foundational problems at all levels from teaching to research and administration.

tom

tom abeles